Author Topic: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade  (Read 4924 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sal Atticum

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7121
  • Karma: 38
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota
ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« on: February 19, 2009, 07:57:21 AM »
'Twould be nice if we had some law school students on here to discuss this.  You can all figure out what I personally think of this issue.

Homo sapiens should have the generic name capitalized and both names italicized.  Thank you AP, but who knows if this is the way it appeared in the bill?

I think we need to define the words "organism" and "genome" in this case, just to be sure.  Although it would be fairly interesting to see a court case that ended up being decided on science.

Quote
N.D. House OKs anti-abortion measure
Associated Press
Published Tuesday, February 17, 2009
BISMARCK — A measure approved by the North Dakota House gives a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being, a step that would essentially ban abortion in the state.

The bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended abortion rights nationwide, supporters of the legislation said.

Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate for its review.

The two-paragraph bill declares that “any organism with the genome of homo sapiens” is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

It says the Legislature may choose one of its members to help defend the new law if its constitutionality is challenged in court.

“For all purposes ... a human being begins at fertilization, and so any harm to that fertilized egg will be murder — any destruction of it,” said Rep. Kari Conrad, D-Minot, an opponent of the bill.

The measure’s sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, R-Minot, said the legislation did not automatically ban abortion. Ruby has introduced bills in previous sessions of the Legislature to prohibit abortion in North Dakota.

“This language is not as aggressive as the direct ban legislation that I’ve proposed in the past,” Ruby said during House floor debate on Tuesday. “This is very simply defining when life begins, and giving that life some protections under our constitution — the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

During the measure’s House hearing, Conrad said, the bill’s supporters “were very clear that their intent was to challenge .... Roe v. Wade. So they intend to put the state of North Dakota into court.”

Critics of the measure say it will cost millions of dollars to defend, but Ruby said the state has been willing to go to bat for other principles that were less important.

North Dakota’s attorney general has defended telemarketing restrictions and hemp farming, Ruby said. “And yet, we’re afraid to defend human life?”

“How much do we spend in prisons? How much do we spend in human services?” he said. “A million dollars is one mile of road ... and we’re worried about that (expense) for human life.”
« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 08:01:10 AM by Sal Atticum »
JUST EXTRA POLISH. I DO SOME WORK WITH EXCELL SO I KEEP THE CAPS LOCK ON :-P

Offline Plantains

  • I've succumbed to corporate level marketing ploys.
  • UND
  • *
  • Posts: 2868
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • No you are the one that is stupid!
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2009, 01:22:56 PM »
We discussed this heavily in ALL of my criminal justice classes. (what you were saying basically)

The question isn't whether it's right or wrong, because thats for ones own opinion. The question is, at what point should the law intervene, if at all?

We discussed extensively if you happen to harm a pregnant woman... well lets just make it clear... if you shoot a pregnant woman with intent to cause death and she dies and happens to be carrying a child in the 1st trimester, is it a double murder?

What if you intentionally shoot her in the stomach intending to kill the "organism" as well as the mother whilst knowing that the mother is in the 1st trimester?

Roe v Wade would say no, yet cases like this happen often and will often aggravate the charges.

So the question isn't "when is it ok to kill the baby?" since it's really never ok to kill the baby. Albeit considering that there are some circumstances where abortion is by far the best option for EVERYONE (including baby) involved, just as there are opposite instances.

The question is moreso, "when does the combination of sperm and egg become a homosapien?"

We also discussed a particular case in which a mother "birthed" a child on her own claiming she had no idea she was pregnant. Then placed the "child" into a shoe box and left it in a trashcan. The question was, what charges can be placed on her? Can you charge someone with child endangerment if it isn't a child? Can you charge someone with homicide if what was killed wasn't a homosapien? Can you be charged with murder if what you "killed" never took any breaths and therefor was never considered legally "alive"?
Alaska Unicyclist: if you ban me, i'll set your complex on fire.... just a heads up

Offline Sal Atticum

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7121
  • Karma: 38
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2009, 10:32:40 AM »
Quote
The question is moreso, "when does the combination of sperm and egg become a homosapien?"

It's technically always Homo sapiens, since it carries that genetic code.  The question is when does it become someone who should have legal rights?

I really can't answer that.  As Obama said during one of the debates (and I completely agree, because he's not someone who studies this sort of thing), "That's above my pay grade."  Unfortunately this is one of those areas where science is not going to help when a large part of the debate over abortion is based on thousands of years of culture (for both sides).  The idea of a "soul," the idea of mind-body duality, the urge to protect anything considered a "baby"--all of these things are not going to disappear in a puff of logic, no matter what science says, because they are too ingrained.

My thoughts for the moment.

JUST EXTRA POLISH. I DO SOME WORK WITH EXCELL SO I KEEP THE CAPS LOCK ON :-P

Offline Plantains

  • I've succumbed to corporate level marketing ploys.
  • UND
  • *
  • Posts: 2868
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • No you are the one that is stupid!
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2009, 12:42:35 PM »
I was trying to convey the "when does it have legal rights" aspect in my question.

Abortion tho is one of those rare instances in which it is both under the categories of "Mala Prohibita" (society thinks its wrong) and "Mala in se" (law makes it wrong).

Abortion is I believe inherently wrong, however there are still many instances where abortion is not only the only option, it is the best option for ALL parties involved.

Similarly though, where you find many different socio and psychological theories on how a child is developed mentally (after its born) you will have differing opinions. I'm not a monster, I understand that a child put up to a loving adoptive family can "overcome". But similarly, those who are pro-choice must know that killing "babies" is wrong as well?

This is why politics should stay away from medical type things. Stem-cell research is a great example.

If you have diabetes, you KNOW that stem cell research is really the only chance you have of ever being cured with our current technology. Well... if one candidate was pro-stem cell research but wanted to opress a large group of people, you'd likely vote for them simply because of survival.

Moreover... politicians should just shut the #$%^ up and leave the country to the people.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 12:49:25 PM by Guardrail »
Alaska Unicyclist: if you ban me, i'll set your complex on fire.... just a heads up

Offline pmp6nl

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5621
  • Karma: 113
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota.com
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2009, 01:33:46 AM »
This debate is a bit too intense for my tired brain right now, but my favorite part is:

Quote
The two-paragraph bill declares that “any organism with the genome of homo sapiens” is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

haha, any person except those that have different "ways of life" .. shall I say.  Think back to what this legislative body failed to pass earlier this year.  I dont think they are being very consistent.  Or perhaps they are being consistent when it falls in line with their own beliefs.. as opposed to all persons supposed protection of rights.  :wtf:
CampusDakota.com

Offline Plantains

  • I've succumbed to corporate level marketing ploys.
  • UND
  • *
  • Posts: 2868
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • No you are the one that is stupid!
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2009, 09:05:59 AM »
The purpose of government is simply to impose their views on the people, hence our societal norms are dictated by the masses (or those with the most power). Our system is perfect in the sense that they are elected.

This statement should be read aloud while rolling your eyes.
Alaska Unicyclist: if you ban me, i'll set your complex on fire.... just a heads up

Offline Sal Atticum

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7121
  • Karma: 38
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2009, 10:01:00 AM »
I'm becoming more open to the idea of term limits for congress, with the idea that "politics" shouldn't be a career choice.

Think of all the economic stimulus!  Lobbyists would have to spend a great deal more money to buy the new people once the people they had previously bought were out of time.
JUST EXTRA POLISH. I DO SOME WORK WITH EXCELL SO I KEEP THE CAPS LOCK ON :-P

Offline pmp6nl

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5621
  • Karma: 113
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota.com
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2009, 10:35:11 PM »
Quote
The purpose of government is simply to impose their views on the people, hence our societal norms are dictated by the masses (or those with the most power). Our system is perfect in the sense that they are elected.

This statement should be read aloud while rolling your eyes.

Unfortunately.  Do you think it always has been this way and will always be this way?

I'm becoming more open to the idea of term limits for congress, with the idea that "politics" shouldn't be a career choice.

Think of all the economic stimulus!  Lobbyists would have to spend a great deal more money to buy the new people once the people they had previously bought were out of time.

Interesting idea!  Now how do you implement it?
CampusDakota.com

Offline Plantains

  • I've succumbed to corporate level marketing ploys.
  • UND
  • *
  • Posts: 2868
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • No you are the one that is stupid!
Re: ND House passes bill to challenge Roe v. Wade
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2009, 05:59:51 PM »
Quote
The purpose of government is simply to impose their views on the people, hence our societal norms are dictated by the masses (or those with the most power). Our system is perfect in the sense that they are elected.

This statement should be read aloud while rolling your eyes.

Unfortunately.  Do you think it always has been this way and will always be this way?

Yes. I don't honestly see any reason why it would be different. I'm not even sure its a bad thing, we should be happy to have an adversarial system.
Alaska Unicyclist: if you ban me, i'll set your complex on fire.... just a heads up

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is an apple, it starts with an r?:
What is 5 plus 5?:
Which Dakota has the city of Fargo:

anything
realistic
anything